[sdiy] physical modelling

[Dave Krooshof]

>>Dave Krooshof
>Stefano

>> I think the kick of analogue synthesizers lies in the area's where
>> their behavior is not according to their models. This is the reason why
>> you will find so many different schemeatics for - example- sine wave
>> genarators. They should all be similar, yet they are not.
>The problem is taking in account everything, and yes, there are some
>unsolvable problems, even if you have al the computing power you want. But
>given enough power, you can go very close to the real thing.
So the difficultness correlates with how deep you want to get into it.
I guess plain ordinairy FM is not that hard. Maybe the filters are.
But to me, analogue synths do sound simple compared to physical,
mechanical instruments.
But I see you can get into this heavily.
(BTW is this why the mooger fooger RTAS plugin in protools
is so heavy on processor time?)

>> These are in deed so straight forward, you could build them into your
>> wristwatch. PM is interesting to model strings, reeds, tubes and drumskins
>> with,
>> but not something that hasn't really got a phyisical world of it's own.
>No, this is not true. It's pretty easy, once you have modelled an instrument
>(and this is definitevely not easy, if you are doing well the job), to change
>some physical characteristic and simulate an "impossible" instrument.
>For instance, a guitar with strings triple the size, what happens if you play
>a string instrument in an atmosphere of helium, and on....
But this is exactly the area I do find interesting.
Still your modelling the mechanical world, altough the settings are odd.
But incase of an analogue synth, what is the physical world your modelling?
Are you actually about to model it to component level?
As in 'change the instruments from silicium to germanium diodes while
playing'?
Or a model of our famous all tube BBD?


Dave